Sigma/Quantary 135-400mm Question

[eyelab]

First, I do beleive Sigma makes Ritz Camera's lenses (Quantary)? So this would be one of the same.

Bought this lens a while back and never got good pictures with it. So I kept it in storage. Well, I want to get into wild life. So I went back and started messing with it to find out exactly my problem. First of all, I need to hand hold it seeing how I am going to be shooting spur of hte moment type shots. So I practiced a bit, and realized I need ISO @ about 400 or 500 so I can have a shutter of about 1/1250 to get action to STAND STILL and get crisp pictures. I took a few of a red tailed hawk and they came out beautiful! I figured out how to use the cam.

Well, the other day I had my lens setup and ISO 400 again. I noticed a BIT of blurr on the 1/1250s so I tried 1/1600. I had plenty of light, beautiful. I looked at them when I got home and the tree branches where just blurred and the bird itself. No idea what could of changed. What is ideal shutter speed to get the picture crisp? I did a few shots @ ISO 400, F/5.6-f/11. I had more then enough light so I dropped down to ISO 200 once to see how much better pictures would be, less noise obviously but still same blurryness. Someone once told me that formula to calculate is shutter should be twice as fast as focal length. 400mm = 1/400 / 2 = 1/800. 1/800 I know is WAY to slow. 1/1600 should of been more then fast enough. I can post some picture samples when I get home from work. just trying to figure out a formula to use to get these picures crisp because apparently that formula isn't working.

Its interesting I got crisp shots @ 1/1250, same settings 3 days later, I got blurry shots @ 1/1600. :P I did get bigger picures though (was closer to the hawk). I will post samples if needed from both!

-- eye

[ktixx]

First off, from my understanding quantaray is not as good as sigma. I do believe that Sigma makes some quantaray lenses, but this doesn't mean that they would make them the same way or with the same materials. It is sort of like comparing Ford or Mercury with Aston Martin, same company, just not the same quality...never-the-less, this doesn't mean that you can't get some nice shots out of your equipment.

Second, you really should post some of your pictures. I would say that 1/1600 is most likely fast enough to capture action, and would have to assume that it is more an issue of focus, rather than motion blur. I didn't see the camera that you were using listed in your post, but even with a 2x multiplier, that is still only an 800mm lens, which would normally require a shutter speed of 1/800 for handheld shots. Doubling that with a 1/1600 shutter speed should cause no blur from camera shake and should be fast enough for bird shots.

Definitly post some of your images, but also do your own test. Take a tripod outside and do a still shot at 1/1600 and 1/800 and see if your images are sharp at 400mm.

Good Luck
Ken

[eyelab]

Ok, the file 'resized' full, is the whole picture resized to under 230kb so I can upload it.

Shutter 1/1600, Apature @ F/9, ISO @ 200.

Keep in mind I had to take up the exposure a bit in Nikon Capture, adjust some of the sharpness, and remove some noise.

Crop 01, just shows the outline of the hawk. Just looks a bit blurry. For a shutter @ 1600, should be no blurryness around the outside :/ That hawk's body is the focus point.

Crop 02 shows the actual focus point. Still not to crisp at all. I have a few @ F/5.6 (which is lowest I can go @ the full 400mm). And the pic will look even blurrier at my focus point. So I am kind of forced to use a F of about 8 or higher. I noticed 8-11 seems to be a good spot (prob all lenses sweet spots).

Crop 03 is just a few brances below. This is where it looks 'ghosty'. Every shot I take with it, anything not in the focus point, no matter how high my F number (Apature), I get this. I even get this 'ghosty' blurred effect on the focus points of the picture (See Crop 01 & 02).

Is this semi normal though for a telephoto and I just need to clean it up like I do? Is it a good shot or? Really have nothing else to compare too as far as full 100% crops go.

So would you say that this lens is pretty good quality? Or really bad? Should I try getting a different lens? Or is this pretty good quality for the lens?

Feedback would be appreciated! Maybe I need to get a 2.0x TC for my sigma 2.8 70-200? :P

-- Kevin

[ktixx]

The first picture seems to be fine to me. The green branches are out of focus, but that is because of DOF, if you want to get the branches in focus just stop down on your aperture (higher f/number). I happen to think that the out of focus branchs (the green ones) look nice. As far as the rest of the hawk is concerned, it just seems like a less expensive telephoto lens. That is the reason why good quality telephotos cost so much. I would definitely recomend getting a 2x for that sigma 70-200, that is a much nicer lens than the quantaray. Possibly another member can give you some more insight.
I would recomend subscribing to a website like photobucket.com, upload your pictures and paste the link, that way you can make much larger pictures.
Ken